Yeah, I could go either way on the protecting the PATH front. On the one hand, I like the idea of expecting users to know enough about their environment to not re-alias something. On the other hand, if you want to use this in a shared environment, it's more responsible to check all of the current aliases and the PATH before creating a new alias, so using this in a shared environment would require looking through the bash profile anyway (if there isn't a check).

In other news, I like that you called it "Yoke". It's short and sweet, while really symbolizing the action. Great work!

What happens if you execute yoke in, say, /usr/local/python? Did you just alias python to a directory, or are there safeguards in place? I see in your code that you're making sure you're not re-aliasing an already existing alias with

if list.has_key?(name)
false

but I didn't dig deep enough to see if you're checking everything in the PATH.

This is one of my favorite terminal commands, mostly because I feel as if I am expressing a stern frustration whenever I use it.

No. You will run that command, Bash.

Side note: instead of the home key you can use ctrl+a to move the cursor to the beginning of the line. This is useful if you don't have a home key, or if you want to keep your hands on the home row. ctrl+e to move to the end of the line.

Yes, there are places where margin 0 auto; is the best choice, and there are places where negative margins are the best choice. But this is the best solution, or at least a very reasonable solution, for a specific class of problems where you have a fixed positioned element with a highly dynamic width which needs centered, and supported across all browsers.

Not using a wrapper when you don't need to is certainly a good principle to work by. But another good principle is: don't sacrifice cross-browser support to avoid using a wrapper.

It's simply not the case that everyone can develop using only the most modern browser techniques, and I don't think a healthy debate centers around the value of competing techniques which cannot be proven objectively better in all cases, nor do I think it's appropriate to look down your nose at people who disagree with those non-objectively provable claims.

I think this is a good technique, used in the right situation. So, thanks for the tip!